Computer networks have become valuable resources capable of storing vast amounts of information. Computer networks typically include interconnected devices (e.g., workstations and servers) having data stored thereon. On occasion, users of computer networks copy data from one network device to another. For example, a particular user may copy a file stored on his workstation to a shared network drive. By way of another example, a network administrator may perform a network backup operation by copying files stored on networked devices to a backup data repository.
Unfortunately, existing tools for copying network data are not without shortcomings. For example, many existing tools rely upon significant user intervention and direction. Accordingly, users and administrators often spend considerable time manually copying data between network devices.
Other existing tools attempt to automate data copying operations. However, the extent to which these tools are automated is significantly limited in many situations. For example, network backup tools can copy network data in bulk but are unable to fulfill targeted requests for select data in an automated fashion. Thus, existing tools for copying network data are not proficient for all data copying preferences and situations, especially situations requiring that specific subsets of network data be retrieved.
For example, modern litigation has introduced a need for selectively copying network data in accordance with specific criteria included in discovery requests. Parties to litigation may receive discovery requests requiring the parties to retrieve select information from their respective computer networks. Because of the limitations of existing tools for copying network data, the parties are often forced to dedicate significant man-hours to manually identify and copy the select network data that will satisfy the criteria set forth in discovery requests, without going beyond the scope of the requests. In many cases, information technology (“IT”) staff members are required to manually and remotely connect to network machines and copy select data. Not only is this technique time consuming, inaccuracies may be introduced because different IT staff members may use different methodologies to copy data. This creates risks of omitting relevant data or inadvertently altering document metadata, which refers to information about a particular data set that may describe, for example, files dates, sizes, and formats, as well as how, when, and by whom the data set was received, created, accessed, and/or modified. Moreover, many data copying tools are incapable of producing exact copies of data because the metadata (e.g., the creation date and accessed date) associated with the copies is modified from the original when a copy is made.
The manual operations required to fulfill electronic discovery requests are especially taxing for large organizations that operate vast computer networks and/or are involved in multiple or on-going litigations. Moreover, reliance on manual copying operations makes it difficult for organizations to certify strict compliance with legal requirements associated with electronic discovery requests. Without an auditable log of copy operations, it is difficult to prove that copied data is complete and compliant with legal obligations. In addition, manual copying operations tend to result in duplicative efforts being expended to recopy data that is common to overlapping discovery requests.